The Essayist. SHAKESPERE FACTS, FANCIES, FORGERIES, AND "What is your substance, whereof are you made, And you, but one, can every shadow lend.—Shakespere's Sonnets, 53. INTRODUCTION. SHAKESPERE! There is conjuration and mighty magic in the name, and there is mystery about the man. The place of his birth is a shrine for pilgrim feet, and Stratford-upon-Avon holds the dust of her (and England's) noblest intellectual son. Yet of this man, who "was not for an age, but for all time," fewer memorials are preserved than of almost any of Britain's mighty minstrels. Far away, in the time-distance of five centuries ago," Old Dan. Chaucer" shows himself as a reality, and no myth, "Singing he was, or floyting alle the day; He was as fresche as is the moneth of May." Dunbar, Gawin Douglas, and Sir David Lyndsay, appear in literary history lifelike and solid. Surrey and Wyatt are known, both in biography and romance. Sydney and Spenser are palpable and substantial figures in the tableaux of their age. The personality and "the very form and pressure" of many of the Elizabethan sages-Raleigh, Fairfax, Daniel, Drayton, Marlowe, Chapman, Middleton, Jonson, &c., are known to the most casual readers of biography; yet here is one the greatest-of whom it has been remarked, "He lived' is almost all that can be said." We remember the vividness with which the thought of this selfforgetfulness, and as it were, spirit-like impalpability, shone on us as we stood in the chancel of Stratford Church--the church in which he was baptized, in which he worshipped, where he mourned, and in which he lies " so sepulchred," "That kings, for such a tomb, might wish to die;"saw before us the bust that "was for gentle Shakespeare cut" and beheld the grave which held all that was mortal of him who was "not one, but all mankind's epitome." A dear friend accompanied us, one whom a connection with the British Controversialist first, and now long and fast, made ours, and we recall the singular feeling with which we, almost simultaneously, remarked how difficult it was to realize Shakespere in all the breadth, power, and geniality of his nature, as a visible presence" among men: he seems so much more like an impersonality, a shape, a shade, a force, a voice, than as a form shrouded in a "muddy vesture of decay,' and as moving amid the casualities of time and space, possessed of all the attributes of man. And yet we had read, with some care, 66 the abounding biographies of Avon's bard, and knew almost by heart those items of his life which research had rescued from among Time's "alms for Oblivion;" we had conned his precious pages with a lover's ardour and a student's zeal, and could not bear to think of him as one whose "soul was like a star, and dwelt apart" from human friendships, interests, aims, and cares. We were anxious to bring a feeling of his humanity into our souls, and to realize the period when "Mellifluous Shakespeare, whose enchanting quill All that We thought then, as we have often done since, of the remarks of Hallam, -"Of William Shakespeare, whom. we seem to know better than any human writer, it may be truly said that we scarcely know anything. We see him-so far as we do see him-not in himself, but in a reflex image; to us he is scarcely a determined person, a substantial reality, the man Shakespeare. insatiable curiosity and unwearied diligence have hitherto detected about Shakespeare serves rather to disappoint and perplex us than to furnish the slightest illustration of his character.”* We repeat, with a sigh, the curt summarization of Steevens, "All that is known, with any degree of certainty, concerning Shakespeare is, that he was born at Stratford-upon-Avon, married, and had children there; went to London, where he commenced actor, and wrote poems and plays; returned to Stratford, made his will, died, and was buried;" and we were compelled to re-express the ejaculation of Carlyle, "How much in Shakespeare lies hid-his sorrows, his silent struggles, known to himself; much that was not known at all, not speakable at all; like roots, like sap and forces, working underground!" Then we cast our thoughts from the brief, gossipping, uncritical "Life," prefixed to Rowe's "Shakespeare," 1709, to the side-lighted, picturesque, synchronized, though somewhat highly-coloured and imaginative, biography of Charles Knight; and recollecting the researches of Malone, Dyce, Drake, Collier, Hunter, Bell, De Quincey, Wheler, Halliwell, &c., came to the conclusion that it might be possible, by an exercise of discriminating criticism, to attain some more decided and realizable notions of the great dramatist than we at that time possessed. With the view of attempt ing this, we some years ago re-read a considerable amount of Shakesperean literature, taking notes as we proceeded; but other tasks, at that time, prevented the fulfilment of our design, and for awhile these notes have been laid past in a limbo of those interrupted or unfinished attempts which have now and again created excitement "In the quick forge and working house of thought." Our collection of references is dispersed into the libraries from which they were selected, and we are now in a retired nook of a village where the means of extended literary research are sparse and scan; and * "Literature of Europe," vol. ii. p. 175. "When to the sessions of sweet, silent thought, The recent discussions concerning Shakespere have revived the idea relinquished then, and we have resolved to sketch out our plan and lay it before our readers. The necessity for brevity laid upon us in this department of this serial will materially interfere with the literary execution of our design; but it will have this advantage, that it will make our outline occupy a compass much narrower than we originally contemplated, and will therefore, perhaps, lessen its tedium to our readers, though it will certainly increase our labour. The accommodation of our original view to the exigencies of the present state of opinion among Shakesperean critics and readers will necessitate a remodelment of our materials, a special arrangement of the topics of our research, and an extension of our subject itself. With this view we have selected the words contained in the title of our paper, as in our opinion inclusive of all that we shall require to consider. We make no pretensions to originality of research; we have no new facts" to reveal; no fresh materials to bring into the argument. We intend only such a reconstruction of that which is already known as by its method may lead us to feel the human in Shakespere's character; as may bring him before us as a man; as may show him somewhat in his habit as he lived; and, by an appeal to chronology, prove that, though we know too little to satisfy our insatiable curiosity, we do really know more than is commonly believed. The vagrant manner in which dates have hitherto wandered here and there, in the pages of professed biographers, has been quite mystifying. If it is only by "applying this to that, and so to so," that a memoir can be constructed, it will surely be well that these should be placed in their natural order; for then and thus may we most likelily break the spell 66 "That does in vile misprison shackle up" our thoughts of Shakespere, and bring out the man as well as the dramatist. Let us try. 1.-SHAKESPERE'S ANCESTRY. "Honours best thrive When rather from our acts we them derive, Than our foregoers."-All's Well that Ends Well. I. Paternal. "Breakspear, Shakespear, and the like," says Verstegan, in his "Restitution of Decayed Intelligence " [Antwerp, 1605], "have been surnames imposed upon the first bearers of them for valour and feats of arms." Bosworth field on the 22nd August, 1485, beheld the first of the Tudor dynasty proclaimed—“ King Henry the Seventh." Shortly after this, Henry began to enrich, with possessions and goods, according to their desert and merit, 66 those who had then aided him. "For his faithful and approved service to the late most prudent prince, King Henry VII., of famous memory," probably Richard Shakespere, of Snitterfield, near Stratford-on-Avon, was advanced and rewarded with lands and tenements given to him in those parts of Warwickshire." He had two sons at least, Henry and John. The latter-born, perhaps, about 1530-became resident in Henley Street, Stratford, prior to 29th April, 1552. In that street, on 2nd October, 1556, he bought the copyhold of a house and garden, as well as that of a house in Greenhill Street, having a garden and a croft-i. e., a small piece of pasture or tillage land-attached to it. A man of business, too, was he then; for on 17th June, 1556, he was sued at court as a glover, and on 19th November he impleaded a neighbour for unjustly detaining 18 quarters of barley. Aubrey says he "was a butcher;" Rowe, that he was "a considerable dealer in wool." In 1557 he was a burgess, a member of the corporation (for a charter had been granted to Stratford in 1553), and, by choice of the court-leet, ale-taster for the borough, "sworn to look to the assize and goodness of bread, or ale, or beer," within its precincts. In that year (or early in the next?) he married; for "Joan Shakespeare, daughter to John Shakespere," was baptized on 15th September, 1558. 66 II. Maternal. The groom of the chamber to Henry VII. was Robert Arden, a scion of a family of the highest antiquity in Warwickshire. His son, also named Robert, had by his first wife a family-at any rate, of seven daughters; of whom Mary was the youngest. John Shakespere, having married the daughter and one of the heirs of Robert Arden, of Willmecote, in the parish of Aston Cauntlow," became under the will of the said Robert Arden, dated 24th November, 1556, possessed of "land in Willmecote, called Asbies," as well as of the property in Snitterfield, on which his father had been reared. The Ardens and Shakesperes were naturally brought together, and the rising burgess of Stratford seems not to have advanced unadmitted claims to the hand of the heiress of Asbies, whose father had died in December, 1556. After this event, if we suffer rather more than a year to elapse, we may fancy that on or about Christmas, 1557, John Shakespere and Mary Arden, suitably attired and attended, arrived in (say?) Aston Cauntlow parish church, with full intent that then and there "All sanctimonious ceremonies may And that, no opposition being offered to their union, having plighted the full assurance of their faith, the ceremony of their compact was duly solemnized, so that, shortly afterwards, Henley Street was musical for many a merry hour. The young couple may have had a goodly round of visitings to do and to get; and though the world was disturbed by wars, they seemed to enjoy both peace and prosperity at that time. In 1558, John Shakespere was one of the four constables of Stratford, an office then always held by chosen burgess, and in that year also, as we have said, Joan Shakespere was born. Rising in municipal dignity, in 1559 he became an affeeror-an official whose duty it was to fix and determine the fines leviable for offences against the bye-laws of the borough. In 1560 it is probable his daughter Joan -named after Mrs. Shaksperes [eldest ?] sister-died. He was one of the municipal chamberlains in 1561. On 2nd December, 1562, his daughter Margaret was baptized; and on 30th April, 1563, she was buried. In 1564 he was a member of the Common-hall of Stratford, and to an important document of that hall in that year, he did, (as Charles Knight thinks) in writing, affix his name. In that same year, his eldest and world-famous son was born-WILLIAM SHAKESPERE. II. SHAKESPERE'S BOYHOOD AND YOUTH. "This jewel in the world."-Cymbeline. The circumstances of a child's parents, and the conditions of life around him, so influence his position, prospects, and progress, as to form a full justification, in all constructive memoirs, for taking these as basis of inference regarding the probabilities of a person's career. Indeed, the circumstances of the parents are the conditioning causes of many of the mental, personal, and social sufferings and exertions of their children, and no complete view of the formative principles of any man's life can be obtained unless we know the environments of his earlier years. For these reasons, as well as in defect of personal anecdote and gossip, the biographers of Shakespere have expended great industry and employed singular care in acquiring, from every accessible source, information regarding the Shakespere family, during the youth of William, their son, in the belief that thence they may infer, with tolerable certainty, the special influences which operated on the destiny of the mighty dramatist. In this, however, they have only been partially successful. The following is, as nearly as possible, a chronological summary of the chief matters that have been learned, and of the deductions sought to be drawn from them, as premises, viz. : 1564. In the Stratford register of baptisms, under date 26th April, appears the entry [in incorrect Latin]," William, son of John Shakespere." As it was customary in these days to baptize as early as convenient,* a tradition that he was born on the 23rd (equal to 5th May, new style), has been generally acquiesced in, especially as it was put into substantive form by the Rev. Joseph Greene, master of the Stratford Free School, about a century after his death, and seems to be confirmed, or at least to be implied (as is generally understood), by the inscription on his monument. * Edward Alleyn, the player, founder of Dulwich College, was baptized the day after his birth; Oliver Cromwell, four, and John Milton, eleven. |